954 Learning Strategies for Twice -Exceptional Students Hannah Aqilah Amran Rosadah Abd Majid Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Ma

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Learning Strategies for Twice -Exceptional Students

Hannah Aqilah Amran

Rosadah Abd Majid

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,

Malaysia

Abstract

A twice-exceptional student who is gifted but also has an additional exceptionality challenges teachers and educators to deliver the best teaching strategies. This paper reviews the current learning strategies, interventions and practices that specifically focused on twice-exceptional students. Research articles were obtained on online database of published articles. The scope is focused on intervention practices or instructions in the behavioral, developmental, emotional, or educational areas. By making a systematic review, this article summarizes 44 research studies on twice- exceptionality interventions between 2000 and 2018, regardless of the areas of disability. The findings are categorized into five main themes, preceded by the most used in studies which is academic or learning strategy, followed by support, strength or talent-based, art or music, and technology. An effective intervention must be tailored to their strengths and potentials as well as providing remediation and support for their social and emotional needs. This study is vital and meaningful for educators and parents to provide these twice-exceptional students the best intervention that suits their own strengths and needs.

954 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Introduction

Twice-exceptional learners, commonly known, as gifted students with learning disabilities. Their characteristics are diverse and different from each other. They have specific talents, higher-level intellectual abilities, superior vocabulary and exceptional comprehension of abstract ideas and concepts, high levels of creativity, unusual imagination, but may exhibit poor reading and writing skills, lack organizational and study skills, have a low self-esteem, and creates sophisticated humor (Buic & Popovici, 2014; Foley-nicpon, 2013; Nielsen, 2010). However, the lack of understanding of the criteria of twice-exceptionality, often interferes with parents and teachers recognizing the problems of twice-exceptionality students. Typically, twice-exceptional students fit into one of three categories (Baldwin, Baum, Pereles, & Hughes, 2015; Buic & Popovici, 2014):

(a) Students are identified as gifted (with no diagnosed disability): These students' disabilities are masked by the student’s talents. Moreover, students are often considered underachievers due to poor self-concept, lack of motivation, or seen as lazy.

(b) Students are diagnosed with a disability (with no identified giftedness): These students' giftedness is covered up by their disability. They are rarely referred for gifted services as they often being underestimated or their potential is not identified.

(c) Students are neither identified as disabled, nor as gifted: These students are considered to be average, so neither giftedness nor disability is clearly distinguishable and they usually sit in general classrooms. Failing to recognize and identify the twice-exceptionality students denies their right to take advantage of effective treatments or programs to accommodate their limitations and strengthen their potentials.

For all three of these categories, specific strategies must be used to accommodate their limitations, and at the same time develop their potentials and talents. Teachers have to understand and recognize their student, then provide the best learning strategies or interventions. Their educational experiences and curriculum must support their strengths and potentials (Schultz, 2012), otherwise, the culture of education which focuses more on accommodating their limitations, will prevent their potentials and talents to be developed (Dole, 2000; Hua, Shore, & Makarova, 2012). To date, the review of intervention for twice-exceptionality is still limited. Nicpon, Allmon, Sieck, & Stinson, (2011) study the empirical investigation of twice- exceptionality focused on Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) only. Therefore, this article summarizes 44 research studies on interventions with twice-exceptionality students between 2000 and 2018, regardless of the areas of disability.

955 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to identify learning strategies, intervention and practices for twice- exceptionality students. This study is vital and meaningful for educators and parents to provide twice-exceptional children with the best interventions that suit with their own needs and conditions. An intervention helps twice-exceptional children to be better adapted, independent persons valued members of society (Leroux & Levitt-perlman, 2000).

Methodology

Criteria of the Studies in the Review Research articles were obtained on online database of published articles. Article included in this review were published between 2000 and 2018, and can be either qualitative and/or quantitative studies. A Boolean search is used to combine the keyword to ensure the true concept of review achieved. The keywords used are “gifted with disability”, “twice-exceptional”, “2e”, “gifted”, “talented”, “intervention”, and “learning strategy”. After eliminating duplicated articles, 94 articles have been obtained. Then, after the screening process where title and abstract been screened, to ensure the article included the inclusive criteria. Articles with non-intervention were also eliminated.

Figure 1: Criteria of the Studies

956 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Database searching

(n = 94 articles)

ation Identific - Duplicates article removed Duplicate article,

- Title and abstract screening

g non-human subject, (n = 56)

Screenin and non-intervention

Full text of articles assessed Study that have

ty (n = 48) participant without Eligibili gifted with disability

Total articles obtained

(n = 44) Included

Figure 2: Systematic review process

Participants All studies are specifically conducted on twice-exceptional (2e) students, which are gifted with any disabilities. The disabilities including Learning Disability (LD), Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Asperger, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Cerebral Palsy (CP), Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), Emotional and Behavioral Disorder (EBD), hearing impairment, neurological (processing) disability, sensory disability (cortical visual impairment), anxiety, dyslexia and other Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD).

Interventions To be selected for this review, the article had to be focused on intervention practices or instructions in the behavioral, developmental, emotional, and/or educational area in an educational, clinical, home and/or community setting. The participants were identified as being gifted with other exceptionalities, such a.s autism spectrum disorder (ASD), Asperger syndrome, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, Emotional and Behavioral Disorders (EBD), learning disability, pervasive developmental disorder, and so forth.

957 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Results Table 1. Continued Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

ACADEMIC / LEARNING STRATEGIES

Boxtel (2016) Strategy / self -checklist in Student can express Qualitative: gifted-ASD math: his/her reasoning process case study R-read problem twice during problem solving E- Express the problem. situations. (Translate into equation) A-answer S-Share O-Offer explanation N-notice how peer solve it & compare

Wang & (a) Strategies: repetitively reading Peers support was the Qualitative Six 2e's Neihart text, asking questions, and most influenced factor in Singaporean (2015b) managing time, note-taking and twice-exceptional s’ secondary audio-recording of lessons academic achievement. school (b) academic engagement: good teaching & caring teacher, parental support, peers influence (c) academic self-efficacy (expectations from others and friends influence in practice of discipline and school rules)

Lee & (a) Individual attention from The interventions Review gifted-ADHD Olenchak teacher, shorter assignments suggested are broad article (2014) with more directions and strategies, not focused on feedback. gifted-ADHD (can be (b) leadership activities applied to all types of (c) provide challenging topics students). (d) set realistic expectations (e) organizational strategies (f) interactive learning (technology) (g) opportunities to express creativity (h) interact with likeminded peers (i) appreciate their individual differences (j) counseling and social skills training

958 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

Crepeau- (a) Small-group counseling Improved participant’s Qualitative: gifted-LD Hobson & (b) response to intervention (RTI) academic skills, but still case study Blanco model struggles with boredom (2013) (c) behavioral/ social-emotional due to not being intervention challenged in his areas of (d) creative graphic organizers gifted.

Willard-Holt Learning strategies: Participants perceived Mix-method 16 males et al. (2013) that overall school (Qualitative) (a) choices or flexibility in experience fails to assist (10-23 years). learning, assessment, and rate them in learning their Gifted with (b) use reward strategies and use potential. ASD, LD, strengths to face weaknesses However, they were able OCD, CP, (c) work together in a group to use their strengths to emotional, deal with weaknesses. hearing impairment, neurological (processing), & sensory disability (cortical visual impairment)

Schultz (a) school culture that allows 2e to School culture and early Qualitative Six college (2012) be in Advanced Placement placement decisions students of (AP) affect enrollment in AP twice- (b) student goals and transition and for-college-credit exceptional plan classes for the twice- students in (c) test and environmental exceptional student. Advanced accommodations Placement (d) early education impact (AP) (e) mentoring and familiarity with twice-exceptional student (f) positive experiences of teachers

Assouline &(a) Academic acceleration / Improved understanding Qualitative - 3 students. Whiteman advance academic work. of twice-exceptionality case study gifted with (2011) (b) comprehensive evaluation of will enhance their unique ADHD, gifted student characteristic role in assessing twice- with ASD, (c) assessment exceptional students and gifted with (d) psychoeducational reports in recommending SLD must include information about appropriate interventions giftedness as well as the in schools disability

959 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

Kuo, Su & (a) Problem solving strategy Students gained Quantitative 61 students Maker (2011)(b) Group student based on similar significantly higher (aged 4-6 talents and interests scores on closed years) problems, and lower 2e: (ASD, scores on open-ended LD, Asperger, ones in the Multiple hearing or Intelligence class. visual impairment)

Yssel et al. (a) Group study among twice- Parents' perception on Qualitative gifted-LD (2010) exceptional students child’s learning and (b) Project-based & structured socio-emotional (c) Small activities, form large reactions projects (d) Creating secondary and tertiary(1) children are not getting activities in learning (retaining recovery and student focus) strengthening (2) strength of child neglected, because focused on child’s weakness (3) difficult to handle child's socio-emotional problems

Hannah & Increasing student's Metacognitive skills of Qualitative 13 male Shore (2008) comprehension in reading. secondary students are gifted-LD better due to students understanding the verse they read. However, lower secondary students are more confident with existing knowledge (reject new information read) than secondary students.

Mann R.L. Effective teaching practices to Successfully reduced Qualitative LD with (2006) students of gifted (spatial) - LD's weaknesses and gifted (spatial verbal weaknesses: attitude of improved learning strength) caring teachers, learning based achievement. on student’s strength, student-

960 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

centered learning.

Weinfeld et(a) Instruction in the student's area Successfully handling Review gifted-LD al. (2005) of strength and weakness. complicated GLDs: by article (b) differentiated program providing facilities and (individualized instructional adaptation to GLD adaptations and students. accommodations) (c) comprehensive case management to coordinate all aspects of the student's individual educational plan. (d) appropriate training and making important resources available

Yssel et al. Camping program: gifted Student achievement Qualitative 12 gifted-LD (2005) programming (enrichment), increased in science and secondary social and emotional skill math. Students are school development, and highly motivated to learn students organizational skills. topics they interested. But, poor academic self- concept (afraid to fail and not a risk-taker), and difficult to make self- expression.

Winebrenner(a) Teach to appreciate their Compaction and Review gifted-LD (2003) individual differences (build differentiation article self-esteem) opportunities must be (b) teaching the larger concepts offered to twice- first, then the details exceptional students. (c) teaching organizational strategies (d) set realistic expectations for themselves

961 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

Nielsen (a) Continuum of alternative Recommendations were Review gifted-LD (2002) service options provided to educators to article (b) access to gifted curriculum develop programs and (c) access to technology strategies to help (d) counseling students access their (e) curricular interventions giftedness while (social and emotional compensate their strategies, enhancing disabilities. giftedness, compensation strategies in academic areas & behavior management)

Baum et al.(a) Solve problems creatively A dually differentiated Review gifted-LD (2001) (b) Highlight abilities, maximize curriculum of Project article potential HIGH HOPES, helped (c) Focus on strength 2e's student compensate for problematic weaknesses by applying basic skills creatively to an authentic problem.

Zental et al. Shorter assignments with detail Teaching how to Qualitative - 9 boys (8-10 (2001) directions, checkpoints and simplify, breakdown, or case study years) feedback, simplify, breakdown, categorize assignments, ADHD, or categorize assignments, projects, materials, and gifted, gifted projects, materials, and ideas, ideas, and then providing with ADHD include elements of play. checkpoints along the way would be more effective.

Leroux & Varied instructional Effectiveness of Qualitative - 1 boy of Levitt- interventions, emotional and intervention according to case study gifted-ADHD Perlman social support, and twice exceptional (8 - 9 years) (2000) collaboration between strengths and educators and parents. weaknesses.

962 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

Reis et al. (a) study strategy Perspective of successful Qualitative 12 university (2000) (b) parental support twice-exceptional students of (c) compensation support students towards an gifted with (d) counseling academic learning SLD (e) self-perceived strength experience: compensation strategy was effective all participants experience a negative experience during schooling (teachers assume they are lazy, focus on weaknesses, follow LD programs that are not organized and suit them)

STRENGTH / TALENT - BASED

Baldwin (a) Strengths and Interests Recognizing Qualitative - 3 students (2015) (b) Accommodations and characteristic, strengths case study gifted with Modifications and weaknesses ASD / (c) Learning Needs facilitated teachers to emotional / (d) Social-Emotional Needs deliver an appropriate behavioral (e) Support service, and specific problem strategies to support students’ needs across the spectrum.

Wang & (a) develop interests in academic Academic concepts and Qualitative- Six 2e's Neihart domains efficacy has been Interpretative Singaporean (2015a) (b) create experiences of success achieved and led to Phenomenon- secondary (c) parental and teacher support academic success. logical school (d) positive peer influence Analysis (IPA)

Baum et al. (a) psychologically safe Potential development Qualitative - 10 students (2014) environment program helps to case study (8 males, 2 (b) extra time (without rushing) overcome social, females emotional and cognitive 2e: GAD/ (c) tolerance for asynchronous challenges. OCD/ behaviors Asperger/ (d) positive relationships anxiety/ ASD/ (e) strengths-based, talent- ADHD focused environment

963 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

Hua et al. Focus to develop the talent of Help 2e’s students to Qualitative- gifted-ADHD (2012) 2e (rather than improve understand their identity, semi- deficits) obstructs the autobiographi 1. Inquiry-based learning underachievement, cal narrative 2.Negotiation better than opportunity to involve accommodation and contribute in community.

Foley Niepon Focus on ability, opportunity to Academic learning Review gifted-LD, et al. (2011) explore their strengths and improved by using self- article gifted-ADHD, receive support in their own strength (creativity, gifted-ASD needs / weaknesses problem solving skills, and analysis capabilities)

Newman et The Museum projects (based on Participant’s self- Quantitative visual spatial al. (2009) Leonardo Da Vinci works): efficacy increased and gifted- LD play and grow into art, organizational skills architecture, engineering and improved. However, science (Japanese toys and students did not show technology, rubber-band significant improvement powered cars, aero modeling, in academic skills. and boat building).

Weinfeld et(a) instruction in the student's area Successfully handling Review gifted-LD al. (2005) of strength and weakness. complicated GLDs: by article (b) differentiated program providing facilities and (individualized instructional adaptation to GLD adaptations and students. accommodations) (c) comprehensive case management to coordinate all aspects of the student's individual educational plan. (d) appropriate training and making important resources available

964 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

SUPPORT / COUNSELING

Park et al. (a) Parental involvement in Asian-American parents Qualitative 10 Asian- (2018) children’s education have a strong parenting American (b) advocate for their children style and the pursuit of twice- (c) diverse enrichment activities continuous advocacy in exceptional (d) switched to school with specific addressing the parents learning needs complexities of 2e (e) constantly educated themselves children. and whole family

Baldwin (a) Strengths and Interests Recognizing Qualitative - 3 students (2015) (b) Accommodations and characteristic, strengths case study gifted with Modifications and weaknesses ASD/ (c) Learning Needs facilitated teachers to emotional/ (d) Social-Emotional Needs deliver appropriate behavioral (e) Support services, and specific problem strategies to support students’ needs across the spectrum.

Wang & (a) strategies: repetitively reading Peers support was the Qualitative 6Six 2e's Neihart text, asking questions, and most influenced factor in Singaporean (2015b) managing time, twice-exceptional s’ secondary (b) note-taking and audio- academic achievement. school recording of lessons (c) academic engagement: good teaching & caring teacher, parental support, peers influence (d) academic self-efficacy

Lo & Yuen Coping strategies: Negative experience on Qualitative: 3 university (2015) their path to learning. case study students, (a) trial and error method However, opportunity gifted with (b) positive influence and positive influence to SLD (c) family/parental support motivate them (to ignore (d) matching talents to criticisms and labeling)

965 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

opportunities and create good achievement.

Neumeister(a) Recognition (gift & disability) Caregiver / parents belief Qualitative - 10 twice- et al. (2013)(b) Providing and seeking support they play an important grounded exceptional despite cost/inconvenience role in their children's theory individuals (c) Framing child’s beliefs and academic success by that expectations: normalizing recognizing the successfully disability advantages and graduated or (d) Maintaining high expectations disadvantages of the working. children, and the responsibility for the development of their potential children.

Foley Niepon Focus on ability, opportunity to academic learning Review gifted-LD, et al. (2011) explore their strengths and improved by using self- article gifted-ADHD, receive support in their own strength gifted-ASD needs / weaknesses (creativity, problem solving skills, and analysis capabilities)

Olenchak Counseling based in 5 Talents Positive impact on Mix method gifted with (2009) Unlimited aspects: attitudes, self-concepts (Quantitative) LD productive thinking, and creativity of twice- 57 students communication, future exceptional students. expectations, decision making, planning.

O'brien & (a) trust (parent know their child Recognize each part of Qualitative: intellectually Giovacco- best) unique children's case study gifted with Johnson (b) believe in child’s potential and development, their learning (2007) strengths-focus. strengths and disability (c) involve inclusively (social skill) weaknesses, as gifts. (d) participation in extracurricular activities (develop motor skills Positive belief creates & self-concept) hope and confidence to success.

Thomas & 3 models of counseling: Family pressure reduce, Qualitative twice- Ray (2006) Belin-Blank Center Model help to express feeling exceptional Structural-Strategic Model within twice-exceptional student Imaginative-Postmodern Model family, parents begin to support twice-

966 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

exceptional children, help creating solutions / modifications according to interests and potential of children.

King (2005) Self-understanding and self- Students must be Review gifted with acceptance, continuous support, encouraged to recognize article LD coping strategies when their own strengths and frustrated, group counseling, limitations to prepare for social relationship, parent future. understanding and emphasize child's potential, career planning, and mentorship.

Kennedy, (a) understand program goals and Collaborative Review general and Higgins & create students profile relationship helps article special Pierce (2002)(b) building trust teacher to plan, solve educators and (c) communication and problem and design teachers of information instructions that meets gifted (d) sharing the academic and students. (e) modifying instruction emotional needs of (f) evaluation twice-exceptional students.

Reis et al. (a) study strategy Perspective of successful Qualitative 12 university (2000) (b) parental support twice-exceptional students (c) compensation support students towards an gifted with (d) counseling academic learning SLD (e) self-perceived strength experience:

(a) compensation strategy was effective (b) negative experience during schooling (teachers assume they are lazy, focus on weaknesses, LD programs not organized and suit them)

967 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 1. Continued

Reference Strategy / Intervention Result / Main findings Methodology Participants

ART/ MUSIC

Nelson & (a) multisensory teaching Including multisensory Qualitative 5 professional Hourigan (b) isolating musical components techniques to music music, gifted- (2015) (c) learning of jazz and popular instruction, help dyslexia dyslexia music students in reading text (d) using technology and music, and increases (e) small group instruction self-confidence.

Abramo (a) highlight strengths and mitigate Multisensory approach is Paper concept gifted with (2015) challenge ideal to 2e student. disability (b) emphasize integrative thinking and deemphasize dispersive thinking (c) flexibility of choice (d) teach organizational skills, self- regulation, and compensation strategies (e) building relationships

TECHNOLOGY

Sullivans et Minecraft game: Minecraft allow teachers Developing / no participant al. (2017) to easily implemented designing (a) freedom and variety learning environments (b) simulated and real-world for twice-exceptional problems students (based on their (c) adaptable environment that challenges). pleasing to students

Gunter & Improve student motivation Successfully motivated Quantitative 48 (16 males , Kenny (2012) Use of technology / media students to read and 32 females) improved their gifted with understanding in reading reading. difficulty

968 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Table 2. Number of studies based on intervention strategy Intervention Strategy Studies

Academic/ learning strategies 19

Strength / talent-based 8

Support 13

Art/music 2

Technology 2

Total studies 44

Table 3. Participants Reference Participants Leroux & Levitt-Perlman (2000) 1 boy of gifted with ADHD (age 8 - 9 years) Reis et al. (2000) 12 university students of gifted with SLD Baum et al. (2001) gifted with LD Zental et al. (2001) 9 boys (age 8-10 years): ADHD, gifted, gifted with ADHD Nielsen (2002) gifted with LD Kennedy, Higgins & Pierce (2002) general educators, special educators, and teachers of gifted students Winebrenner (2003) gifted with LD Yssel et al. (2005) 12 secondary school of gifted with LD Weinfeld et al. (2005) gifted with LD King (2005) gifted with LD Mann (2006) gifted (spatial strength) with LD Thomas & Ray (2006) twice-exceptional student O'brien & Giovacco-Johnson (2007) intellectually gifted with learning disability Hannah & Shore (2008) 13 males gifted with LD students

Newman et al. (2009) visual spatial gifted with LD Olenchak (2009) 57 students gifted with LD Yssel et al. (2010) gifted with LD Kuo, Su & Maker (2011) 61 students (age 4-6 years): gifted with ASD/ Asperger/ hearing impairment/ visual impairment/ LD Foley Niepon et al. (2011) 3 students: gifted with LD / ADHD / ASD Assouline & Whiteman (2011) 3 students: gifted with ADHD, gifted with ASD, gifted with SLD Schultz (2012) 6 college of twice-exceptional students in Advanced Placement (AP) Hua et al. (2012) gifted with ADHD Gunter & Kenny (2012) 48 (16 male, 32 female): gifted with reading difficulty Willard-Holt et al. (2013) 16 males (age 10-23 years): gifted with ASD/ LD/ OCD/ emotional/ CP/ hearing impairment/ neurological (processing)/ sensory disability (cortical visual impairment) Crepeau-Hobson & Blanco (2013) gifted with LD

969 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Neumeister et al. (2013) 10 twice-exceptional individuals that successfully graduated or working. Lee & Olenchak (2014) gifted with ADHD Baum et al. (2014) 10 students (8 males, 2 females) gifted with GAD/ Asperger/ anxiety/ ADHD/ OCD/ ASD Baldwin (2015) 3students: gifted with ASD/ emotional/ behavioral problem Wang & Neihart (2015a) 6 twice-exceptional Singaporean secondary schools Wang & Neihart (2015b) 6 twice-exceptional Singaporean secondary schools Nelson & Hourigan (2015) 5 professional music: gifted with dyslexia Abramo (2015) gifted with LD Boxtel (2016) gifted with ASD Lo & Yuen (2015) 3 university students: gifted with SLD Sullivans et al. (2017) no participant Park et al. (2018) 10 Asian-American twice-exceptional parents ______

Discussion

Participants

All studies conducted are focused on twice-exceptional students, which are gifted with particular disabilities. Majority participants of the studies are having Learning Disability (LD), while the others are having Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Asperger, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Cerebral Palsy (CP), Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), emotional and behavioral disorder, hearing impairment, neurological (processing) disability, sensory disability (cortical visual impairment), anxiety, dyslexia and other Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) that not being mentioned specifically (see Table 3). The age of participants ranged between the age of 4 and 23 years, where the participants were including pre-school students, primary and secondary students, college or university students, as well as twice-exceptional individuals who were graduated or employed. Nevertheless, few studies did not mentioned detail of participants specifically. Furthermore, study of Sullivan, Robb, Howell, Marshall, and Goodman, (2017) did not involve any participants directly as their study was developing or designing method. Sullivan et al. (2017) developed mine-craft video game to allow teachers to easily implemented learning environments for twice-exceptional students based on their challenges.

Intervention Strategy Based on the findings of all the studies, author categorized the intervention strategies into five main themes, which are academic or learning strategy, strength or talent-based strategy, support, art or music, and technology. Not all interventions recommended are suitable for all type of twice-exceptional children. Thus, treatment matching is crucial. Therefore, effective interventions must tailor to the unique strengths and needs of the twice-exceptional individual.

970 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Theme 1: Academic / Learning Strategies A number of studies recommended academic or learning strategies for twice-exceptional learners. Assouline and Whiteman (2011) and Schultz (2012) proposed that academic acceleration or Advanced Placement (AP) should be considered for the twice-exceptional students with additional behavioral and emotional interventions. These recommendations reinforce the suggestion of Nielsen (2002) to give an opportunity for twice-exceptional student to access to gifted curriculum and their right to sit in gifted programming or advanced academic work should not be denied (Assouline & Whiteman, 2011; Yssel, Margison, Cross, & Merbler, 2005).

Besides that, Leroux and Levitt-perlman (2000) and Weinfeld, Barnes-robinson, Jeweler, and Shevltz (2005) highlighted the importance of differentiated program and varied instructional interventions according to student's area of strength and weakness. Furthermore, an organizational skill also has been emphasized by some researchers as it help to motivate and improve student academic performance (Crepeau-hobson & Bianco, 2013; Lee & Olenchak, 2014; Winebrenner, 2003; Yssel et al., 2005; Yssel, Prater, & Smith, 2010). In addition, Yssel et al. (2010) recommends the learning should be project- based and structured. They are also encouraged to make small activities, then forming large project. In contrast, Winebrenner (2003) recommends teaching the larger concepts first, then the details. Meanwhile, finding indicated that twice-exceptional students were easier to learn from shorter assignments with detail directions, simplify and breakdown technique, categorize tasks, projects, materials, and ideas, provide checkpoints and getting feedback (Zentall, Moon, Hall, & Grskovic, 2001).

Other academic and learning interventions strategies were used by researchers to increase student's comprehension in reading (Hannah & Shore, 2008), set student goals and transition plan, and set realistic expectations (Lee & Olenchak, 2014; Winebrenner, 2003), self-checklist in solving mathematic (Boxtel, 2016), problem solving strategy (Kuo, Su, & Maker, 2011), leadership activities (Lee & Olenchak, 2014), express creativity in learning (Baum, Cooper, & Neu, 2001; Lee & Olenchak, 2014), providing challenging topics (Zentall et al., 2001) student-centered learning (Mann, 2006), and group activities (Kuo et al., 2011; Yssel et al., 2010). Grouping the students based on similar interests and strengths in learning session, increased self-confidence and help students to gained significantly higher academic achievement.

Theme 2: Strength / Talent – Based Most researchers also emphasize the use of strength or talents-based to support the twice- exceptional learners. In fact,, the strength-based approach is proven successful in developing a positive mindset, healthy self-esteem, strong self-efficacy and higher academic achievement in twice exceptional students (Baldwin et al., 2015; Newman et al., 2009; Wang & Neihart, 2015a). Therefore, it is efficient to view them as being gifted first and consider their disability as secondary. First and foremost, the children must understand their identity and recognized their own strengths and weaknesses. (Hua et al., 2012). So that, the twice-exceptional children will appreciate their individual differences, build self-

971 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

esteem and self-acceptance (King, 2005; Lee & Olenchak, 2014; Winebrenner, 2003). Teachers are encouraged to frame the child’s belief and expectations to overcome their disability (Neumeister, Yssel, & Burney, 2013).

Educators have to maximize their potentials, explore their strength and interest, strengthen their abilities, and appreciate their uniqueness in teaching practices (Baldwin et al., 2015; Baum et al., 2001; Hua et al., 2012; Lee & Olenchak, 2014; Mann, 2006; Nicpon et al., 2011). Several technique used were develop interests in academic domains and create experience of success (Wang & Neihart, 2015a), use inquiry-based learning (Hua et al., 2012), create talent-focused environment with suitable accommodations and modifications (Baldwin et al., 2015; Baum, Schader, & Hébert, 2014), provide extra time to allow changes without rushing or demanding (Baum et al., 2014), matching talents to opportunities (Lo & Yuen, 2015) and give instruction in the student's area of strength and weaknesses (Weinfeld et al., 2005). Overall studies found that emphasizing strength-based strategies has improved learning achievement, increased self-efficacy, and help to overcome social and emotional challenges. Indeed, focus on student’s strengths giving them an opportunity to thrive and be successful in any way they are good at.

Theme 3: Support Having lack of social skills, social isolation, low self-esteem are the personality traits of twice-exceptional children. Thus, few researchers focused on support interventions in order to overcome it. Strong parenting style with continuous parental support help growing children’s potential, improved self-efficacy and overcome their weaknesses (Lo & Yuen, 2015; Neumeister et al., 2013; Park, Nicpon, Choate, & Bolenbaugh, 2018; Reis, Mcguire, & Neu, 2000; Wang & Neihart, 2015a, 2015b). Furthermore, Park, Nicpon, Choate, and Bolenbaugh (2018) found that strong parenting style rouse them to find and switch their children to school with specifics learning needs, involve in their children’s education, involved in diverse enrichment activities, providing and seeking support despite cost or inconvenience, trust and believe in child’s potential, constantly educate whole family and continuously advocate others about their children’s complexities (King, 2005; Neumeister et al., 2013; O’Brien & Giovacco-johnson, 2007; Park et al., 2018) .

Besides that, understanding and caring teachers with good teaching practices influence the academic engagement of twice-exceptional students (Wang & Neihart, 2015b). Comprehensive counseling program for gifted with disability offered good results in students social skills, self-efficacy and attitudes (Nicpon et al., 2011; Olenchak, 2009), create positive belief that build hope and confidence to success (O’brien & Giovacco- johnson, 2007), reduced family pressure and provide opportunities to express feeling within twice-exceptional family (Thomas & Ray, 2006), recognize children’s strengths and limitation, and help creating solutions or modifications (King, 2005; Thomas & Ray, 2006), abolish children’s negative experience during schooling (Lo & Yuen, 2015; Reis et al., 2000), and make a career plan and future expectations to encourage them to prepare for future (King, 2005; Olenchak, 2009).

972 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

In addition, positive influence and peer support help them ignore criticisms and labeling (Lo & Yuen, 2015) and it became the main contribution in twice-exceptional s’ academic achievement (Wang & Neihart, 2015b). Support for the unique social and emotional needs of twice-exceptional students was very challenging to the educators. Therefore, teachers must be trained to understand the characteristics and needs of gifted students with learning disabilities, as well as strategies to facilitate their learning, set realistic expectations, and support students’ needs across the spectrum (Baldwin et al., 2015; Neumeister et al., 2013). Besides, educators are encouraged to collaborate their knowledge, skills, and support of other educators or professionals in the schools (Kennedy, Higgins, & Pierce, 2002).

Theme 4: Technology A dynamic, real-time response, enjoyable and engaging environments has made technology become an effective strategy in learning (Gunter & Kenny, 2012). Moreover, by using technology, a concept of static pictures in book can be visualized. Learning in technology environment provide modifications and accommodations to their learning content and environment, allow students to explore areas of particular interest in greater depth, developed experimental learning, has opportunity to express their creativity and critical thinking, motivated them in learning, increased self-confidence and independence (Gunter & Kenny, 2012; Sullivan et al., 2017).

A tremendous variety of assistive technology is available today, providing the opportunity for gifted with disability students to access information technology, enhances learning, and performs daily living for students with disabilities. However, study of technology intervention that focused on twice-exceptional students is still limited.

Theme 5: Art /Music Intervention in art and music emphasized the multisensory approaches that highlight an integrative thinking and deemphasize dispersive thinking, provide flexibility based on their potentials and strengths, motivate them, sharpen their creativity, increase self-efficacy, improved organizational skills and grow the strengths and mitigate challenges (Abramo, 2015; Nelson & Hourigan, 2015). Nonetheless, there is still limited research on music intervention specifically on students who are gifted with disabilities.

Conclusion

The current review identiﬁes focused intervention practices for twice-exceptional students. Teachers must develop a plan to provide modifications and accommodations to their learning content and environment based on student’s strengths and potentials as well as provides remediation and support for their social and emotional needs. Celebrate student’s differences with positive influences and continuous support, and using effective instructional approaches, help twice-exceptional learners to overcome their academic

973 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

difficulties, social and behavioral challenges and provide an opportunity for them to thrive and be successful in satisfying careers and lives. Furthermore, educators are encouraged to collaborate with other educators, parents, professionals, and therapists to share knowledge, experiences, and skills in creating solutions or modifications according to strengths and needs of twice-exceptional children.

Acknowledgement This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Abramo, J. M. (2015). Gifted Students with Disabilities “Twice Exceptionality” in the Music Classroom. Music Educators Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432115571367. Assouline, S. G., & Whiteman, C. S. (2011). Twice-Exceptionality: Implications for School Psychologists in the Post – IDEA 2004 Era, 380–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2011.616576. Baldwin, L., Baum, S., Pereles, D., & Hughes, C. (2015). Twice-Exceptional Learners, (October), 206–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217515597277. Baum, S. M., Cooper, C. R., & Neu, T. W. (2001). Dual differentiation: an approach for meeting the curricular needs of gifted students with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 477–490. Baum, S. M., Schader, R. M., & Hébert, T. P. (2014). Through a Different Lens : Reflecting on a Strengths-Based, Talent-Focused Approach for Twice-Exceptional Learners, 58(4).https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214547632. Boxtel, J. M. Van. (2016). REASON A Self-Instruction Strategy Mathematics. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(1), 66–73. Buic, C., & Popovici, D. (2014). Being twice exceptional: gifted students with learning disabilities, 127, 519–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.302. Crepeau-hobson, F., & Bianco, M. (2013). Response to Intervention: Promises and Pitfalls for Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451212454005. Dole, S. (2000). The Implications of the Risk and Resilience Literature for Gifted Students with Learning Disabilities. Roeper Review, 23(2), 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554074. Foley-nicpon, M. (2013). Gifted Child Quarterly’s Special Issue on Twice- Exceptionality:Progress on the Path of Empirical Understanding. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213501195. Gunter, G. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2012). UB the director: Utilizing digital book trailers to engage gifted and twice-exceptional students in reading, (1997). https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429412440378. Hannah, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (2008). Twice-Exceptional Students ’ Use of Metacognitive Skills on a Comprehension. Gifted Child Q, 52(1), 3–18.

974 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

Hua, O. L., Shore, B. M., & Makarova, E. (2012). Inquiry-based instruction within a community of practice for gifted – ADHD college students. Gifted Education International, 30(1), 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429412447709. Kennedy, K. Y., Higgins, K., & Pierce, T. (2002). Collaborative Partnerships Among Teachers of Students Who Are Gifted and Have Learning Disabilities. Intervention in Scgool and Clinic, 38(1), 36–49. King, E. W. (2005). Addressing the Social and Emotional Needs of Twice- Exceptional Students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 16–20. Kuo, C.-C., Su, F.-L., & Maker, C. J. (2011). cultivating problem solving abilities in gifted preschool ers. Gifted Educational International, 27(3), 311–326. Lee, K. M., & Olenchak, F. R. (2014). Individuals with a gifted / attention deficit / hyperactivity disorder diagnosis: Identification, performance, outcomes, and nterventions. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429414530712. Leroux, J. A., & Levitt-perlman, M. (2000). The Gifted Child with Attention Deficit Disorder: An Identification and Intervention Challenge, 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554028. Lo, C. C., & Yuen, M. (2015). Succeeding against the odds : Observations on coping by three intellectually very able university students with specific learning difficulties in Hong Kong. Gifted Education International, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429415585407. Mann, R. L. (2006). Effective Teaching Strategies for Gifted/Learning-Disabled Students With Spatial Strengths. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, XVII(2), 112– 121. Nelson, K. P., & Hourigan, R. M. (2015). A Comparative Case Study of Learning Strategies and Recommendations of Five Professional Musicians With Dyslexia. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123315581341. Neumeister, K. S., Yssel, N., & Burney, V. H. (2013). The Influence of Primary Caregivers in Fostering Success in Twice-Exceptional Children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57(4), 263–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213500068. Newman, T. M., Brown, W., Hart, L., Macomber, D., Doyle, N., Kornilov, S. A., Grigorenko, E. L. (2009). The Leonardo Laboratory: Developing Targeted Programs for Academic Underachievers with Visual-Spatial Gifts. Talent Development & Excellence, 1(1), 67–78. Nicpon, M. F., Allmon, A., Sieck, B., & Stinson, R. D. (2011). Empirical Investigation of Where Have We Been Exceptionality: and Where Are We Going ? https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210382575. Nielsen, M. E. (2010). Exceptionality: A Special Education Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: Recommendations for Identification and Programming Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: Recommendations for Identification and Programming, 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327035EX1002. O’brien, L. M., & Giovacco-johnson, T. (2007). For Parents Particularly: Twice- exceptional Children: Paradoxes and Parenting. Childhood Education, 83(3), 175– 176. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2007.10522906. Olenchak, F. R. (2009). effects of talents unli111ited counseling on gifted / learning

975 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol. 33, No.4, 2019

disabled students. Gifted Education International, 25, 144–164. Park, S., Nicpon, M. F., Choate, A., & Bolenbaugh, M. (2018). “ Nothing Fits Exactly ”: Experiences of Asian American Parents of. Gifted Child Quarterly, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986218758442. Reis, S. M., Mcguire, J. M., & Neu, T. W. (2000). Compensation Strategies Used by High- Ability Students With Learning Disabilities who Succee In College. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(2), 123–134. Schultz, S. M. (2012). Twice-Exceptional Students Enrolled in Advanced Placement Classes. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212444605. Sullivan, M. O., Robb, N., Howell, S., Marshall, K., & Goodman, L. (2017). Designing Inclusive Learning for Twice Exceptional Students in Minecraft, 32(2). Thomas, V., & Ray, K. E. (2006). Counseling Exceptional Individuals and Their Families: A Systems Perspective. Professional School Counseling, 10(1), 58–65. Wang, C. W., & Neihart, M. (2015a). Academic Self-Concept and Academic Self-Efficacy: Self-Beliefs Enable Academic Achievement of Twice-Exceptional Students, (2005), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2015.1008660. Wang, C. W., & Neihart, M. (2015b). How Do Supports From Parents, Teachers, and Peers Influence Academic Achievement of Twice-Exceptional Students, (July), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217515583742. Weinfeld, R., Barnes-robinson, L., Jeweler, S., & Shevltz, B. R. (2005). What We Have Learned: Experiences in Providing Adaptations and Accommodations for Gifted and Talented Students With Learning Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 48–54. Winebrenner, S. (2003). Teaching Strategies for Twice-Exceptional Students, 2003, 131–1 37. Yssel, N., Margison, J., Cross, T., & Merbler, J. (2005). Puzzles , Mysteries , and Picasso: A Summer Camp for Students Who Are Gifted and Learning Disabled. Yssel, N., Prater, M., & Smith, D. (2010). how Can Such a get It? Kid not smart, 33(1).Zentall, S. S., Moon, S. M., Hall, A. M., & Grskovic, J. A. (2001). Learning and Motivational Characteristics of Boys With AD/HD and/or Giftedness. The Council for Exceptional Children, 67(4), 499–519.

976